1045 records matched your query
03294aam a2200433Ia 4500 001 E2030C166B5411E69AFE1DDBDAD10320 003 SILO 005 20160826010517 008 121019s2012 ca a b 000 0 eng d 020 $a 9780833076861 020 $a 0833076868 035 $a (OCoLC)813541087 040 $a YDXCP $c YDXCP $d DID $d TXA $d BDX $d KSU $d COD $d BTCTA $d OCLCA $d IWA $d SILO 043 $a n-us--- 088 $a RAND OP-379-OSD 245 02 $a A strategy-based framework for accommodating reductions in the defense budget / $c Stuart E. Johnson ... [et al.]. 260 $a Santa Monica, CA : $b Rand Corporation, $c 2012. 300 $a xvi, 46 p. : $b col. ill. ; $c 28 cm. 490 1 $a RAND Corporation occasional paper series ; $v OP-379-OSD 500 $a "National Defense Research Institute." 536 $a Prepared for the Office of the Secretary of Defense $b W74V8H-06-C-0002 504 $a Includes bibliographical references (p. 45-46). 520 $a This paper suggests an approach for how the Department of Defense (DoD) might execute deep reductions in the defense budget, deep enough that stated defense strategy could not be fully resourced. The cuts examined go beyond the $487 billion announced in January 2012 by Secretary of Defense Leon Panetta. The authors do not argue for or against further reductions. They posit that the ongoing pressure to reduce the federal budget deficit may mandate further reductions in the DoD budget. In this context, they suggest starting from a strategic basis in determining the reductions, prioritizing challenges, and identifying where to accept more risk in the process. The paper demonstrates this method with three illustrative strategic directions that might guide the department in choosing which forces and programs to reduce or to protect while making explicit the risks involved. It builds on the strategic guidance of January 2012, Sustaining U.S. Global Leadership: Priorities for 21st Century Defense. It is intended to inform the debate that will likely take place over the coming months, and years, on how to cope with pressure to reduce the defense budget further while limiting risk to U.S. national security. 505 0 $a Introduction -- Alternative directions for U.S. defense strategy -- Assessing the advantages and risks of alternative strategic directions -- Force reductions linked to alternative strategic directions -- Appendix: Summary advantages and disadvantages of alternative strategic directions/ 610 10 $a United States. $b Department of Defense $x Appropriations and expenditures. 610 10 $a United States. $b Department of Defense $x Planning. 651 0 $a United States $x Finance. $x Finance. 650 0 $a Military planning $z United States. 651 0 $a United States $x Military policy. 650 0 $a National security $z United States. 700 1 $a Johnson, Stuart E., $d 1944- 710 2 $a National Defense Research Institute (U.S.) 830 0 $a Occasional paper (Rand Corporation) ; $v OP-379. 856 41 $u http://www.rand.org/content/dam/rand/pubs/occasional_papers/2012/RAND_OP379.pdf 941 $a 2 952 $l OVUX522 $d 20171229022637.0 952 $l USUX851 $d 20160826071003.0 956 $a http://locator.silo.lib.ia.us/search.cgi?index_0=id&term_0=E2030C166B5411E69AFE1DDBDAD10320 994 $a C0 $b IWAInitiate Another SILO Locator Search